Quack company litigates against its critics

Posted 11 October 2012 

Solal Technologies sues Kevin Charleston, one of its outspoken critics  

11 October 2012

Summary

Solal Technologies is suing Kevin Charleston for R350,000 because he wrote on the Quackdown website that Solal Technologies’ magazine, Health Intelligence is a  “disguised marketing programme for Solal Technologies, a company that actively promotes pseudoscience and aggressively attempts to shut out valid criticism of its advertising.”

Charleston will be defending himself against Solal’s charges. He will have the support of the Treatment Action Campaign. He will be represented by SECTION27. The case, when it comes to court, promises to be an important test of the right to freedom of expression, and the duty of companies to market their products honestly and accurately.

Continue reading the posting at Quackdown 

Business Day article of the 12th October 2012 on the press-release

One Response to Quack company litigates against its critics

  1. Harris 13 October, 2012 at 2:53 pm #

    The Solal – Kevin Charleston – TAC press release has reached an international audience – this time Andy Lewis also known as “Le Canard Noir” has written about it in his blog: “The Quackometer”. [1] It demonstrates the global reach and power of blogging. Imagine how health professionals serving on Health Intelligence’s Advisory Board will be tarred – if they even give a damn! The comparison between Solal and Dr Matthias Rath is compelling. Will Ben Goldacre himself pick up on this and embarrass Solal and their collaborators, CAVI Brands, further?

    I am struck by a few paragraphs.

    “. . . . such questionable claims have the potential to kill very many people. It is quite right that people should be able to challenge such claims and warn people to be on their guard that using such products, at the very least, might not meet their expectations.”

    “So, it would appear that Solal are also trying to silence their critics by intimidation. The answer to a charge of pseudoscience is to produce robust science not to issue writs.”

    “It may be conceivable that Solal are merely misinformed themselves and hence, well intentioned. In such a case, they should drop the case immediately and start a dialogue. It may be though that they are not. In which case, they deserve to be ruined by this misconceived and illiberal action.”

    “The case — when it comes to court — promises to be an important test of the right to freedom of expression, and the duty of companies to market their products honestly and accurately. Solal Technologies is a company that sells and promotes untested remedies for a range of serious illnesses.”

    [1] http://www.quackometer.net/blog/2012/10/solal-technologies-sues-south-african-sceptic.html

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.